Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1887-05-06
A Remarkable Document.
A LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT ON A
WASHINGTON TERRITORY LAND CASE.

A LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT ON A
WASHINGTON TERRITORY LAND CASE.
WASHINGTON, April 27.-The Presi-
dent has sent to the Secretary of the
Interior the following letter in relation
to the controversy between Guilford
l.. Miller: settler, and railroad cor
poration, involving the ownership of
certain lands:
EXECUTIVE MANSION, WAsHINGToN,/
April %, 1887.
DEAR SIR: l have examined with
much care and interest the questions
involved in the conflicting claims of
Guilford L. Miller and the Northern
Pacific Railroad Company to certain
public lands in Washington Territory
The legal aspects of the case have been
examined and passed upon by several
officers of the Government, who did
not agree in their conclusions.
Miller claims to be a settler upon
the land in question, whose possession
dates from 1878. He alleges that he
had made substantial improvements
upon this land and cultivated the
same, and it appears he filed his claim
to the same under the Homestead law
on the 29th of December, 1884.
The railroad company contend that
the land is within the territory or
area from which it was entitled to Sc
lect such quantity of public land as
might be necessary to supply any de-
ficiency that should be found to exist
in the specified land mentioned by the
grant by the Government to said COM
pany in aid of the construction of the
road, such deficiency being contem-
plated as likely to arise from the para
mount right of private parties and set
tiers in the territory embracing said
granted lands; and that the land in
dispute was thus selected by the COM
pany on the 10Th day of December,
1888. The tract including this land
was withdrawn by an order of the In
terror Department from sale and pre-
emptory or homestead sale in antici-
patton of the construction of said rail
road and the deficiency in its granted
lands. In 1880, upon the filing of the
map of the definite location of the
road, the land in controversy and
much more, which had been so with
drawn, was found to be outside of the
limits, which included the granted
lands, but its withdrawal and entry
under our land laws was continued
upon the theory that it was within the
limits of the indemnity lands which
might be selected by the company.
The points in this controversy turned
on the validity and effect of the with
drawal and reservation of this land
and the continuance thereof. The
Attorney General is of the opinion
that such withdrawal and reservation
were at all times effectual and that
they operated to prevent Miller from
acquiring any interest in the lands
claimed by him. With this interpre-
tation of the law and the former Or
ders and actions of the Interior De-
partment, it will be seen that the ef
feet has been the withdrawal and res
ervation since 1872 of thousapds, if
not millions, of acres of these lands
from the operation of these land laws
Of the United. States, thus placing
them beyond the reach of our citizens
desiring, under such laws, to settle ON
the same, and this has been done for
the benefit of a railroad company
having no fixed, certain or definite in
terests in such lands. In this manner
the beneficial policy and intention of
the Government in relation to the
public domain have for all these years
to that extent been thwarted.
There seems to be no evidence to
show how much, if any, Of this vast
tract is necessary for the fulfllment of
the grant to the railroad company;
nor does there appear to be any limi-
tation of time within which this fact
should be made known and the cor
poration is obliged to make its selec-
ton. After a lapse of Is years this
large body of public domain is still
held in reserve to the exclusion of
settlers for the convenience of u cor
poration beneficiary of the govern
ment and waiting its selection. though
it is entirely certain that much re-
served land can never be honestly
claimed by said corporation. Such
condition of public lands should no
longer continue. So far as it is the
result of the executive rule and
methods these should be abandoned,
and so far as it is consequence of
improvident laws these should be re-
pealed or amended.
Our public domain is the national
wealth and the interest of our growth
and the heritage of our people. 1t
promises limitless development and
riches, relief to the crowding popula-
ton and homes to thrift and industry.
These inestimable advantages should
he jealousy guarded and careful and
enlightened policy on the part of the
government should secure them to
the people. In the case under con-
sideration, assume that there is an
abundance of land within the area
which has been reserved for indem-
nifty to which no citizen nor settler